There have been quite a few abusive commenters commenting on this article. I am introducing some rules for commenting:
1) If you have a specific point that you want to refute with evidence, please add a link to the study you are talking about. Peer reviewed studies are okay, blogs that quote or analyse real world data are okay. Newspaper articles or government policy pages are not okay, unless they contain proper links to studies or data.
2) No abuse, no ad hominem comments, no name calling. From now on any commenters who call me names, or who call Dr Malone names, or anyone, will be banned immediately with no warning.
3) I will pray for anyone who calls me names. So I guess if you want to be prayed for and blessed, call me names, and I will ban you from commenting, and also pray for you at the same time.
4) On the other hand you could just post a nice comment asking me to pray for you or bless you.
5) Isn't it about time people left Dr Malone alone? If you like his substack, read it, if you don't, just ignore it. But this whole name calling thing, denying his credentials which are genuine, making up lies about him (whether on the left or the right) really has to stop.
6) If anyone posts an argument against any of the points I have already established in the article, and if give no evidence, I may well simply delete their comment anyway. I don't have time to keep arguing these points.
7) Give it a rest, people! The coronavirus is over, according to the US President...(!)
8) I thank God for Doctors like Robert Malone, for having the courage to stand up for the truth. Thank you Doctor Malone.
If Dr. Malone is a fraud---why does he have 9 Patents for developing the mRNA vaccine technology? This "fact check" website is the true fraud. Do your own deep research...
My article mentions the patents. Maybe you should read my fact check - I actually agree with you about Malone’s credentials.
The title is contradicted by the content - I am testing the claim that Malone is a fraud and I find that he is not a fraud! It’s some of the commenters who are saying the reverse. Please don’t call my site a fraud! It is one of the few fact checks around that honestly looks at the evidence.
Here is my problem with Dr. Malone. I fully accept and never questioned his deep immersion in mRNA techology from the start. It is also clear he has a keen interest in and followed subsequent developments and studies on the subject. It isn't that he is not a scientist or well-informed on the subject: it is precisely because he is that causes my skepticism.
He says he took the mRNA shot, yet I recall he co-authored a study published in 2020 about the dangers of the shot while the shot became available in late 2020. Such studies are done before the publication date.
Even without that study, many earlier studies showed mRNA causes issues when used as a "vaccine" in animals. I find the explanation of needing to travel, which I recall he said, is not overcome by the potential mRNA risks when there are technologies that permit video conferencing.
So, if there is something I have missed, please inform me because I don't trust the man. I think he is a trojan horse in the health freedom area and see his attacks on some in that area as unwarranted. But if I am wrong, please clear that up.
Looking at it objectively I have seen absolutely no evidence that Robert Malone is a Trojan horse. The attacks he made were responses to other people’s attacks on him and defamation of him - others forced him to do this.
Based on your replies to me, I'm going to respectfully observe that you have no training in science., Criticizing a source is never ad hominem nor defamation. Scientists are stringently trained to immediately take apart the source, no need to be polite about it. Dr. Malone would also be trained that way. That's how real science works.
Second, in science, it is no one's job to present counter arguments. It is 100% the scientists' job to establish their own credibility and present information that withstand the most nitpicking scrutiny on the planet. That's how real science works. This is how every scientific study is treated by default. If you feel yourself getting upset about it, you were never trained as a scientist.
Dr. Malone was once respected. Over the last few years he has turned it around. He played a minor role 30 years ago in developing mRNA vaccines, and apparently he felt like he deserved more credit. He has a personal beef with the science establishment. So he has been doing a tour of extreme right anti-science media, where the enjoys being credited as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, tells anti science lies, and gets huge applause after her tells people with no science education exactly what they want to hear. He has disgraced himself with his colleagues, and this is now the only job he can get.
He uis a FALKSE expert. He is going around basking in the praise of people who have noin idea what he's talking about. And he is telling deadly lies about COVID.
As a trained scientist, he knows darn well,, he's lying. He made a decision to cash in and soak up the adulation he never earned. He is the most famous COVID fraud in the world.
Also as a scientist, he can handle criticism and does not need anyone to defend him. Legitimate work survives the harshest criticism, and that is the test for legitimacy.
Dr. Malone made a choice to tell deadly lies for cash and attention. This is immoral. You need to stop once and for all getting life and death medical advice from frauds. He isn't being "suppressed." He is being ignored for the same reason any "science" is ignored. He did terrible work.
No scientist needs prayer for any reason. Pray for those who are harmed by his deadly lies.
I have training in statistics actually and research methods, as well as philosophy. I believe in the motto of the Royal Society - Nullius in Verba - as a guide for science - take no-one’s word for it - in other words, show me the data as Feynman said. And I can read studies. I have actually edited scientific publications, have scientists in my family, and have a broad general knowledge. You’re analysing Dr Malones’s motives - my article is about his credentials - he did indeed contribute to the invention of mRna technology - when the news media claims he did not have a role in inventing this technology they are lying.
You at least admit he had a role. Good.
Now, you make a lot of claims about what he says. I challenge you to choose just one of his claims and justify your objections with actual studies and/or data, instead of merely venting.
By the way, I didn’t take his advice (at the time I hadn’t heard of him), but I weighed a lot of different advice, studies, etc, and refused the jab at the cost of my employment, and later on intentionally caught Omicron. I followed the FLCCC protocols for treatment. I had mild Covid for a week. I know people who died within days of taking the vaccine. Others who caught cancer. Others who are triple vaxxed and still have long Covid etc.
On the question of faith: we all need prayer. It is very easy in life to be deceived and/or to deceive oneself. Truth is much larger than science. Jesus is Truth - He is the “logos” or reason that fills all things - His Spirit will lead us into all truth - science (as you say) relies on integrity above all about results and Christ’s forgiveness can turn a person who has compromised their integrity into a truthful person - God bless you.
Yes exactly - he basically invented the technology, what troubles me somewhat is many of the people who have criticised my article clearly haven’t looked at the facts. It’s a shame that people can be so biased just because he says things they don’t like.
In fact most scientific papers in any specialised field get into journals with no more than three peer reviewers, who are probably part of the scientists own group of professional colleagues and who know the author personally and know that it works by the maxim: you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. Furthermore if you’re following the money trail you had better rather look at big Pharma.
Thanks - you’ve contributed to my article by providing extra evidence! God bless you ‘George Forman’ I will pray God gives you salvation and leads you to the gates of heaven through Jesus Christ
I quote from your article see below for the reference: In animals, the first data of the use of successful in vitro transcribed (IVT) mRNA was reported in 1990, while reporter mRNAs were administered into in vivo mice model, and subsequently, protein expression was identified [5].
I quote from the references in the article you linked to:
5. Wolff J.A., Malone R.W., Williams P., Chong W., Acsadi G., Jani A., Agnes F., Philip L. Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science (80-) 1990;247:1465–1468. doi: 10.1126/science.1690918.
Who do you think Malone R.W. might be, George? Perhaps he is Rudy Malone or Randolph Malone? This is a study from 1990s. One of the earliest references. I think this proves my point don’t you?
You seem to be very emotional about this subject. Why are you so afraid of being wrong?
You clearly have not read my article. I will pray for you Lucie.
Nonetheless I agree with you about being emotional. Mr Forman (not his real name I think) was wrong however. Unfortunately I don’t think Dr Malone is the one who is lying. I wish our governments were being truthful but they have not been.
Whatever Dr Malone might say, the particular mass media line that says he did not have a crucial role in inventing this technology is factually incorrect. As for his other statements, I guess they have to be taken on their merits and need to be weighed individually?
However I’ve been reading his posts for a while and I have noticed that mostly what he has predicted has proven correct, with regards to the vaccine etc, when one takes into account the developing evidence. God bless you.
The so called developing evidence is likely what you are seeing on other anti-vax sites. They are sharing the same grotesquely exaggerated claims of vaccine injuries, based on deliberate misuse of public data. They have successfully created a counternarrative that sadly does not reflect reality.
I read the article and was horrified. It takes many years of training to be able to assess science papers. You have been unfortunately tricked by professional frauds. It's not your fault, they are very very good at what they do. They are n organized group made up of a combination of people w8th no scient]ce training, together with failed scientists and failed medical professionals who cannot get a job in their field. They also have professional marketers among them, and they are experts at making themselves look like legitimate scientists and doctors. They are anything but.
Lucie, Lucie you’re sounding like a conspiracy theorist.
I believe Dr Malone was a darling of the US mainstream media actually before Covid.
No I don’t take peoples word for it. I look at the studies, see how they’re done, if their methods are credible, if it adds up. Malone’s main contribution at the moment as I see it is in giving an overview of what’s going on in a fairly general way and interviewing people, reporting on news
. MRNA vaccines have always caused inflammatory reactions btw. You should read unacceptable Jessica if you want a more scientific take on things though. https://jessicar.substack.com/
But what part of the article horrified you? If you can prove anything I said is false I will gladly revise my conclusions.
I will not say that a person who does not even read the article he is arguing with is an idiot.
I will not even say that a person who refers to a study and has not even read the abstract is an idiot. But this is from the abstract from the article you linked to:
Regarding cardiac-related mortality, the pooled HR suggests that COVID-19 vaccination is associated with an increased risk of cardiac-related mortality (HR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.11], p = .007). Subgroup analysis showed that the male gender is significantly associated with an increased incidence of cardiac-related deaths (HR = 1.09, 95% CI [1.02, 1.15], p = .006).
Everyone must come to your own conclusions: however considering the lack of long term safety data of this new technology, mRNA vaccines, (12 years of longitudinal studies is the normal requirement for a new medicine) and considering the above abstract from the study you quoted, you would have to be an idiot to take the vaccine.
To save you from further making a fool of yourself, I will ban you from commenting.
Yes how popular something is shows how true it is <sarc> How many awards something has shows how true it is. <sarc also> (Reference:see 100 scientists versus Einstein)
I made a number of points to show that Robert Malone has not been lying about being involved in the early development of mRNA tech. You did not refute any of them.
Truth is not determined by popularity but by facts and data. Science needs conflicting opinions and why do Robert Malone’s opinions matter so much to you that you have to heap abuse on me for saying he should be allowed to be heard?
I have absolutely no qualms about banning you. You trolled my comments section to try to get extra subscribers by putting lots of links in to your blog. Had you just done one link I would have left it there.
God bless you.
But I don’t have time for this. If you keep going in this abusive way I’m banning you permanently.
Ivermectin was suppressed - by powerful interests.
The Indian newspaper articles you link to do not say why ivermectin is not included in the new Indian protocols - I wonder if it’s because Omicron is so mild? & if I was going to mention a study in the comments I would include a link to it. Please link to the study you’re talking about.
which has a meta-analysis of all the studies so far go and look at that.
Also, Katalin Karikó did something different - she synthesised mRNA. Malone was the first to get cells to produce proteins using inserted mRNA. Entirely different. Please get your science straight.
Your article contains logical errors. You obviously did not read my fact check which contains peer reviewed references to the fact that he was very involved in the early part of the invention of mRNA tech. For instance https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8001631/ from which I quote:
In animals, the first data of the use of successful in vitro transcribed (IVT) mRNA was reported in 1990, while reporter mRNAs were administered into in vivo mice model, and subsequently, protein expression was identified [5].
The reference at the bottom is to this article:
5. Wolff J.A., Malone R.W., Williams P., Chong W., Acsadi G., Jani A., Agnes F., Philip L. Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science (80-) 1990;247:1465–1468. doi: 10.1126/science.1690918.
Malone R.W. is Robert Malone.
Furthermore your article claims there is nothing about him in a reputable source - I would call Nature magazine a reputable source, wouldn’t you?
Also your article claims that Robert Malone was responsible for a newspaper headline he did not write. This is essentially the straw man fallacy. You are just trying to use my fact check to publicise your erroneous article.
Hi Terry - Sorry I may have misinterpreted your comment. Which set of alleged facts did you mean? Haha - the ones I affirm or the ones the New York Times affirms?
The facts I have researched and affirm as true are not lies: he was the inventor of mRNA technology according to Nature magazine and was certainly on the team in the first published study about mRNA, in an article provided by 'George Forman', so he did participate in creating the vaccines.
The alleged facts, that he did not participate in creating the vaccines or the mRNA technology, are the lies.
He is definitely not the inventor. He played a minor role 35 years ago and his ego has a boo boo that he didn't get full credit. Anyone who cites him as a source instantly labels themselves scientifically illiterate. Once you mention his name, nothing you say can be taken seriously.,
Lucie your argument is called an ad hominem attack.
I presented evidence that Mr Malone was generally regarded as the inventor of this technology - at least until two years ago when the things he was saying became not politically acceptable - you present no argument at all. Have you even read the Nature article? Just because facts don’t please you does not make them not facts.
The reason I wrote this fact check is that it is very clear that when media organisations claim that he is lying about being the inventor of this technology and being some sort of expert in the field, they are actually the ones who are lying.
It would be better to concentrate on the things Malone actually says - take them one by one - argue with them - but to claim he’s lying about basic assertions that can be checked casts into doubt all of their other arguments against him.
And what you imply is that no one can trust a liar. Well that really unfortunately is true.
It is unscientific anyway to trust “experts” - if one can check the data oneself. But I object to people being silenced on spurious untrue grounds and in this matter of vaccines wouldn’t you rather have a robust debate? This just hasn’t happened.
As soon as someone says “Dr Malone is not the inventor of this technology” it casts into doubt everything else they’re saying, and makes one suspect that it’s all just a political witch-hunt.
Hello Terry welcome to Firstfactcheck. Which facts do you say are a lie? Please be specific. I have provided links to non partisan articles - Nature magazine which is a very respectable journal that is in no way anti-Covid vaccines - and to the patents. He certainly did participate in creating the mRNA vaccines, because he invented the very idea and came up with the patents. Which of these things are you saying is a lie? In other words, provide proof.
God bless you I will pray for you; however I will not be taking your advice anytime soon, George. May I suggest you look at facts instead of believing all the propaganda we are fed.
There have been quite a few abusive commenters commenting on this article. I am introducing some rules for commenting:
1) If you have a specific point that you want to refute with evidence, please add a link to the study you are talking about. Peer reviewed studies are okay, blogs that quote or analyse real world data are okay. Newspaper articles or government policy pages are not okay, unless they contain proper links to studies or data.
2) No abuse, no ad hominem comments, no name calling. From now on any commenters who call me names, or who call Dr Malone names, or anyone, will be banned immediately with no warning.
3) I will pray for anyone who calls me names. So I guess if you want to be prayed for and blessed, call me names, and I will ban you from commenting, and also pray for you at the same time.
4) On the other hand you could just post a nice comment asking me to pray for you or bless you.
5) Isn't it about time people left Dr Malone alone? If you like his substack, read it, if you don't, just ignore it. But this whole name calling thing, denying his credentials which are genuine, making up lies about him (whether on the left or the right) really has to stop.
6) If anyone posts an argument against any of the points I have already established in the article, and if give no evidence, I may well simply delete their comment anyway. I don't have time to keep arguing these points.
7) Give it a rest, people! The coronavirus is over, according to the US President...(!)
8) I thank God for Doctors like Robert Malone, for having the courage to stand up for the truth. Thank you Doctor Malone.
If Dr. Malone is a fraud---why does he have 9 Patents for developing the mRNA vaccine technology? This "fact check" website is the true fraud. Do your own deep research...
Hi
My article mentions the patents. Maybe you should read my fact check - I actually agree with you about Malone’s credentials.
The title is contradicted by the content - I am testing the claim that Malone is a fraud and I find that he is not a fraud! It’s some of the commenters who are saying the reverse. Please don’t call my site a fraud! It is one of the few fact checks around that honestly looks at the evidence.
Here is my problem with Dr. Malone. I fully accept and never questioned his deep immersion in mRNA techology from the start. It is also clear he has a keen interest in and followed subsequent developments and studies on the subject. It isn't that he is not a scientist or well-informed on the subject: it is precisely because he is that causes my skepticism.
He says he took the mRNA shot, yet I recall he co-authored a study published in 2020 about the dangers of the shot while the shot became available in late 2020. Such studies are done before the publication date.
Even without that study, many earlier studies showed mRNA causes issues when used as a "vaccine" in animals. I find the explanation of needing to travel, which I recall he said, is not overcome by the potential mRNA risks when there are technologies that permit video conferencing.
So, if there is something I have missed, please inform me because I don't trust the man. I think he is a trojan horse in the health freedom area and see his attacks on some in that area as unwarranted. But if I am wrong, please clear that up.
Thanks!
Maybe you can post a link to that study.
Looking at it objectively I have seen absolutely no evidence that Robert Malone is a Trojan horse. The attacks he made were responses to other people’s attacks on him and defamation of him - others forced him to do this.
Thanks for responding.
Medical Countermeasures Analysis of 2019-nCoV and Vaccine Risks for Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) Posted March 2020
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3546070
Based on your replies to me, I'm going to respectfully observe that you have no training in science., Criticizing a source is never ad hominem nor defamation. Scientists are stringently trained to immediately take apart the source, no need to be polite about it. Dr. Malone would also be trained that way. That's how real science works.
Second, in science, it is no one's job to present counter arguments. It is 100% the scientists' job to establish their own credibility and present information that withstand the most nitpicking scrutiny on the planet. That's how real science works. This is how every scientific study is treated by default. If you feel yourself getting upset about it, you were never trained as a scientist.
Dr. Malone was once respected. Over the last few years he has turned it around. He played a minor role 30 years ago in developing mRNA vaccines, and apparently he felt like he deserved more credit. He has a personal beef with the science establishment. So he has been doing a tour of extreme right anti-science media, where the enjoys being credited as the inventor of mRNA vaccines, tells anti science lies, and gets huge applause after her tells people with no science education exactly what they want to hear. He has disgraced himself with his colleagues, and this is now the only job he can get.
He uis a FALKSE expert. He is going around basking in the praise of people who have noin idea what he's talking about. And he is telling deadly lies about COVID.
As a trained scientist, he knows darn well,, he's lying. He made a decision to cash in and soak up the adulation he never earned. He is the most famous COVID fraud in the world.
Also as a scientist, he can handle criticism and does not need anyone to defend him. Legitimate work survives the harshest criticism, and that is the test for legitimacy.
Dr. Malone made a choice to tell deadly lies for cash and attention. This is immoral. You need to stop once and for all getting life and death medical advice from frauds. He isn't being "suppressed." He is being ignored for the same reason any "science" is ignored. He did terrible work.
No scientist needs prayer for any reason. Pray for those who are harmed by his deadly lies.
I have training in statistics actually and research methods, as well as philosophy. I believe in the motto of the Royal Society - Nullius in Verba - as a guide for science - take no-one’s word for it - in other words, show me the data as Feynman said. And I can read studies. I have actually edited scientific publications, have scientists in my family, and have a broad general knowledge. You’re analysing Dr Malones’s motives - my article is about his credentials - he did indeed contribute to the invention of mRna technology - when the news media claims he did not have a role in inventing this technology they are lying.
You at least admit he had a role. Good.
Now, you make a lot of claims about what he says. I challenge you to choose just one of his claims and justify your objections with actual studies and/or data, instead of merely venting.
By the way, I didn’t take his advice (at the time I hadn’t heard of him), but I weighed a lot of different advice, studies, etc, and refused the jab at the cost of my employment, and later on intentionally caught Omicron. I followed the FLCCC protocols for treatment. I had mild Covid for a week. I know people who died within days of taking the vaccine. Others who caught cancer. Others who are triple vaxxed and still have long Covid etc.
On the question of faith: we all need prayer. It is very easy in life to be deceived and/or to deceive oneself. Truth is much larger than science. Jesus is Truth - He is the “logos” or reason that fills all things - His Spirit will lead us into all truth - science (as you say) relies on integrity above all about results and Christ’s forgiveness can turn a person who has compromised their integrity into a truthful person - God bless you.
You are essentially trolling - either reply to the facts I have enumerated or I will ban you from commenting.
he did not play a "minor" role, that is misinformation bullshit. Go read his dozens of patents and stop spouting slander
Yes exactly - he basically invented the technology, what troubles me somewhat is many of the people who have criticised my article clearly haven’t looked at the facts. It’s a shame that people can be so biased just because he says things they don’t like.
yep, they are sheep that refuse to accept information that contradicts the brainwashing they get from the media!
Read this fact check if you want to know how science really works. Pay special attention to the video of Andrew Hill caving in to pressure from big Pharma to downplay Ivermectin, a very safe and effective drug. https://firstfactcheck.substack.com/p/fact-check-ivermectin-doesnt-help
In fact most scientific papers in any specialised field get into journals with no more than three peer reviewers, who are probably part of the scientists own group of professional colleagues and who know the author personally and know that it works by the maxim: you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. Furthermore if you’re following the money trail you had better rather look at big Pharma.
He is a straight up fraud who has a personal beef with the science community. He is now disgraced.
He is only disgraced by paid propagandists like you. Pha Q
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8001631/ read this if you have the brain capacity, something I highly doubt
Thanks - you’ve contributed to my article by providing extra evidence! God bless you ‘George Forman’ I will pray God gives you salvation and leads you to the gates of heaven through Jesus Christ
I quote from your article see below for the reference: In animals, the first data of the use of successful in vitro transcribed (IVT) mRNA was reported in 1990, while reporter mRNAs were administered into in vivo mice model, and subsequently, protein expression was identified [5].
I quote from the references in the article you linked to:
5. Wolff J.A., Malone R.W., Williams P., Chong W., Acsadi G., Jani A., Agnes F., Philip L. Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science (80-) 1990;247:1465–1468. doi: 10.1126/science.1690918.
Who do you think Malone R.W. might be, George? Perhaps he is Rudy Malone or Randolph Malone? This is a study from 1990s. One of the earliest references. I think this proves my point don’t you?
You seem to be very emotional about this subject. Why are you so afraid of being wrong?
It's normal to be emotional about someone spreading deadly lies.
You clearly have not read my article. I will pray for you Lucie.
Nonetheless I agree with you about being emotional. Mr Forman (not his real name I think) was wrong however. Unfortunately I don’t think Dr Malone is the one who is lying. I wish our governments were being truthful but they have not been.
Whatever Dr Malone might say, the particular mass media line that says he did not have a crucial role in inventing this technology is factually incorrect. As for his other statements, I guess they have to be taken on their merits and need to be weighed individually?
However I’ve been reading his posts for a while and I have noticed that mostly what he has predicted has proven correct, with regards to the vaccine etc, when one takes into account the developing evidence. God bless you.
The so called developing evidence is likely what you are seeing on other anti-vax sites. They are sharing the same grotesquely exaggerated claims of vaccine injuries, based on deliberate misuse of public data. They have successfully created a counternarrative that sadly does not reflect reality.
I read the article and was horrified. It takes many years of training to be able to assess science papers. You have been unfortunately tricked by professional frauds. It's not your fault, they are very very good at what they do. They are n organized group made up of a combination of people w8th no scient]ce training, together with failed scientists and failed medical professionals who cannot get a job in their field. They also have professional marketers among them, and they are experts at making themselves look like legitimate scientists and doctors. They are anything but.
Lucie, Lucie you’re sounding like a conspiracy theorist.
I believe Dr Malone was a darling of the US mainstream media actually before Covid.
No I don’t take peoples word for it. I look at the studies, see how they’re done, if their methods are credible, if it adds up. Malone’s main contribution at the moment as I see it is in giving an overview of what’s going on in a fairly general way and interviewing people, reporting on news
. MRNA vaccines have always caused inflammatory reactions btw. You should read unacceptable Jessica if you want a more scientific take on things though. https://jessicar.substack.com/
But what part of the article horrified you? If you can prove anything I said is false I will gladly revise my conclusions.
I will not say that a person who does not even read the article he is arguing with is an idiot.
I will not even say that a person who refers to a study and has not even read the abstract is an idiot. But this is from the abstract from the article you linked to:
Regarding cardiac-related mortality, the pooled HR suggests that COVID-19 vaccination is associated with an increased risk of cardiac-related mortality (HR = 1.06, 95% CI [1.02, 1.11], p = .007). Subgroup analysis showed that the male gender is significantly associated with an increased incidence of cardiac-related deaths (HR = 1.09, 95% CI [1.02, 1.15], p = .006).
Everyone must come to your own conclusions: however considering the lack of long term safety data of this new technology, mRNA vaccines, (12 years of longitudinal studies is the normal requirement for a new medicine) and considering the above abstract from the study you quoted, you would have to be an idiot to take the vaccine.
To save you from further making a fool of yourself, I will ban you from commenting.
Hi
You haven’t read my article.
I never claim he invented mRNA vaccines.
If you want to comment again read the article first and offer some decent references or I will ban you from commenting here.
Yes how popular something is shows how true it is <sarc> How many awards something has shows how true it is. <sarc also> (Reference:see 100 scientists versus Einstein)
I made a number of points to show that Robert Malone has not been lying about being involved in the early development of mRNA tech. You did not refute any of them.
Truth is not determined by popularity but by facts and data. Science needs conflicting opinions and why do Robert Malone’s opinions matter so much to you that you have to heap abuse on me for saying he should be allowed to be heard?
I have absolutely no qualms about banning you. You trolled my comments section to try to get extra subscribers by putting lots of links in to your blog. Had you just done one link I would have left it there.
God bless you.
But I don’t have time for this. If you keep going in this abusive way I’m banning you permanently.
Ivermectin was suppressed - by powerful interests.
https://firstfactcheck.substack.com/p/claim-ivermectin-was-suppressed
The Indian newspaper articles you link to do not say why ivermectin is not included in the new Indian protocols - I wonder if it’s because Omicron is so mild? & if I was going to mention a study in the comments I would include a link to it. Please link to the study you’re talking about.
look at this study, it’s huge:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361903713_Regular_use_of_ivermectin_as_prophylaxis_for_COVID-19_led_up_to_92_reduction_in_COVID-19_mortality_rate_in_a_dose-response_manner_results_of_a_prospective_observational_study_of_a_strictly_controlled_
And look at
ivmmeta.com
which has a meta-analysis of all the studies so far go and look at that.
Also, Katalin Karikó did something different - she synthesised mRNA. Malone was the first to get cells to produce proteins using inserted mRNA. Entirely different. Please get your science straight.
Your article contains logical errors. You obviously did not read my fact check which contains peer reviewed references to the fact that he was very involved in the early part of the invention of mRNA tech. For instance https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8001631/ from which I quote:
In animals, the first data of the use of successful in vitro transcribed (IVT) mRNA was reported in 1990, while reporter mRNAs were administered into in vivo mice model, and subsequently, protein expression was identified [5].
The reference at the bottom is to this article:
5. Wolff J.A., Malone R.W., Williams P., Chong W., Acsadi G., Jani A., Agnes F., Philip L. Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science (80-) 1990;247:1465–1468. doi: 10.1126/science.1690918.
Malone R.W. is Robert Malone.
Furthermore your article claims there is nothing about him in a reputable source - I would call Nature magazine a reputable source, wouldn’t you?
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w
Also your article claims that Robert Malone was responsible for a newspaper headline he did not write. This is essentially the straw man fallacy. You are just trying to use my fact check to publicise your erroneous article.
Hi Terry - Sorry I may have misinterpreted your comment. Which set of alleged facts did you mean? Haha - the ones I affirm or the ones the New York Times affirms?
The facts I have researched and affirm as true are not lies: he was the inventor of mRNA technology according to Nature magazine and was certainly on the team in the first published study about mRNA, in an article provided by 'George Forman', so he did participate in creating the vaccines.
The alleged facts, that he did not participate in creating the vaccines or the mRNA technology, are the lies.
He is definitely not the inventor. He played a minor role 35 years ago and his ego has a boo boo that he didn't get full credit. Anyone who cites him as a source instantly labels themselves scientifically illiterate. Once you mention his name, nothing you say can be taken seriously.,
Lucie your argument is called an ad hominem attack.
I presented evidence that Mr Malone was generally regarded as the inventor of this technology - at least until two years ago when the things he was saying became not politically acceptable - you present no argument at all. Have you even read the Nature article? Just because facts don’t please you does not make them not facts.
The reason I wrote this fact check is that it is very clear that when media organisations claim that he is lying about being the inventor of this technology and being some sort of expert in the field, they are actually the ones who are lying.
It would be better to concentrate on the things Malone actually says - take them one by one - argue with them - but to claim he’s lying about basic assertions that can be checked casts into doubt all of their other arguments against him.
And what you imply is that no one can trust a liar. Well that really unfortunately is true.
It is unscientific anyway to trust “experts” - if one can check the data oneself. But I object to people being silenced on spurious untrue grounds and in this matter of vaccines wouldn’t you rather have a robust debate? This just hasn’t happened.
As soon as someone says “Dr Malone is not the inventor of this technology” it casts into doubt everything else they’re saying, and makes one suspect that it’s all just a political witch-hunt.
Who paid you to defame Dr. Malone and lie like you did?
Hello Terry welcome to Firstfactcheck. Which facts do you say are a lie? Please be specific. I have provided links to non partisan articles - Nature magazine which is a very respectable journal that is in no way anti-Covid vaccines - and to the patents. He certainly did participate in creating the mRNA vaccines, because he invented the very idea and came up with the patents. Which of these things are you saying is a lie? In other words, provide proof.
piece of shit fucking misinformation artist. I pray you find the Gates of Hell
kill yourself
God bless you I will pray for you; however I will not be taking your advice anytime soon, George. May I suggest you look at facts instead of believing all the propaganda we are fed.